Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

The 'footers say that a normal curve proves a population of real bigfoots. For hoaxers to make prints all over the continent that display this distribution, there would have to be a vast, coordinated, secret society of hoaxers with a keen understanding of statistics and the variability of natural populations. Lots of non-coordinating hoaxers would result in a distribution with multiple peaks, because some would make 14" prints, some 17", some 22", etc. (Can you name this logical fallacy?)

I say there are lots of ways for a hoaxer to make footprints, but the most common is to affix some kind of a form to a shoe worn by a person who then jumps around in some soft substrate, a la Ray Wallace. This kind of a foot probably works best when it's 2-3" longer (and a bit wider) then the hoaxer's shoe. Much bigger than that, and it would get really difficult to walk. My size 11 boots measure out to a 12"X4" footprint. If I affixed a form to them that was 3" longer and 2" wider, the result would be an apparent footprint 15" long and 6" wide - squarely within the peak in Fahrenbach's data. I could easily make a lot of such prints, while walking. If I wasn't concerned about leaving a long trackway, I could make a couple of larger prints this way, maybe 4-5" longer than my own boot.

So . . . if you look at the distribution of the size of feet of adult male humans, you'll find the source of the peak in Fahrenbach's data. If you've got a few hours to kill:

Saskeptic, I think that my theory at BFF regarding the bell curve also included the possibility that the curve does not represent the size of an unclassified Biped's feet, but rather the it shows the distribution of the size of a foot most likely to be hoaxed.

In other words, a Bigfoot print is not going to be regularly hoaxed at under 14" or so, on the same note, a Bigfoot print is not going to be hoaxed at over 21" or so. A hoaxer would think that is TOO BIG for a bigfoot. So of course most hoaxed prints are going to be between A and B, with the highest distribution being right in the middle. Forming a nice bell curve.

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

In other words, a Bigfoot print is not going to be regularly hoaxed at under 14" or so, on the same note, a Bigfoot print is not going to be hoaxed at over 21" or so. A hoaxer would think that is TOO BIG for a bigfoot. So of course most hoaxed prints are going to be between A and B, with the highest distribution being right in the middle. Forming a nice bell curve.

Or, in fact, a non-normal distribution that is narrowly centered on a small number of values, with minimal data at the tails, a.k.a., "leptokurtic."

If anyone gets a chance, I'd be interested in Meldrum's opinion on the falsifiability of Bigfoot in relation to his position. He obviously believes that Bigfoot does exist. But how would he ever know/learn that Bigfoot does not exist? Could there ever possibly be something or a combination of somethings which would cause Meldrum to no longer believe? What might such a thing(s) be?

Is it too late for that now? Is he forever locked into belief even if Bigfoot really doesn't exist? I'm curious what he would say about this topic.

Seeking no credit in saying so, I've been asking those questions (of him) for a bit now. Originally thinking him as coming from a POV of 'honesty and integrity', I was so sure he was in for a 'really rude awakening' when Bigfoot was finally disproved. But wait, WHOOPS, it won't ever be. And I'm also 'so sure' he knows that.

IMO he's one of three things. An idiot, a genius or a liar. Possibly a little of all three. I'd put the big money on the first. He sure acts like a dunce most of the time - but common sense wants to say his 'education' trumps that. Doesn't it? Now, his fondness for being the paid talking head of Bigfoot Science™ gives rise to the notion he's more clever than he looks. I guess he could be just a simple and honest opportunist. And as I recall he's not been too 'apologetic' for his Bigfoot beliefs...hmmm.

I am kinda glad I didn't covert over earlier today. I had an unusual experience this morning. Well not so unusual. Anyways I was out walking in the woods sticking to the usual worn trails. I started to stray off onto some not so used paths. What started me down this one overgrown trail was a sighting. Anyways, it looked dark reddish in color and, ...Well looked unusual and off to the side of the trail just under the pine tree bows. Could of sworn part of this mysterious creature (whatever it was) was moving.
I almost turned away and walked, said whatever. I had to check this out. I don't know who does their shopping out in the woods around here? Maybe the big hairy woods beings, Whatever they are. Anyways this turned out to be an old shopping cart, overgrown a bit, red and looked like it had been there for awhile.
I was trying to figure just what I thought I had seen moving? Not sure yet.
Could be one of these things was trying to teleport at this spot, and the metal of the cart was interfering with the transporting process?

'Footers don't seem to realize that none of their "datasets" have any scientific value, because they exclude data willynilly.their decision to include or exclude data is arrived at all Helly-Nelly.

Fixed it.

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

A big hairy man in the woods would be interesting but I have my own theory. Native Americans once told their children a horror story about the area around Mt. St. helens about a group of large hairy cannibals who lived there to their children. I believe this was an effort to keep people from settling there for obvious reasons and the tale grew with the telling. White men heard the stories and expanded the story until it became the nonsense that it is today.

__________________If at first you don't succeed try try again. Then if you fail to succeed to Hell with that. Try something else.

IMO he's one of three things. An idiot, a genius or a liar. Possibly a little of all three. I'd put the big money on the first. He sure acts like a dunce most of the time - but common sense wants to say his 'education' trumps that. Doesn't it?

To me he is gullible, but it's hard to feel good about calling him an idiot. To me he is like a deer in the headlamps. He's dazzled and just stands there with stolid oblivion. Deer aren't really idiots and you sort of want to think they should know better.

I think Meldrum has a way of thinking (his mind) that is ripe or primed for Bigfoot belief. Don't forget that he is also a devout and practicing Mormon. How can anyone with intelligence believe that Mormon stuff? Well, maybe it's easy for that kind of thinker to also say yes to Bigfoot.

__________________Bigfoot believers and Bigfoot skeptics are both plumb crazy. Each spends more than one minute per year thinking about Bigfoot.

I am kinda glad I didn't covert over earlier today. I had an unusual experience this morning. Well not so unusual. Anyways I was out walking in the woods sticking to the usual worn trails. I started to stray off onto some not so used paths. What started me down this one overgrown trail was a sighting. Anyways, it looked dark reddish in color and, ...Well looked unusual and off to the side of the trail just under the pine tree bows. Could of sworn part of this mysterious creature (whatever it was) was moving.
I almost turned away and walked, said whatever. I had to check this out. I don't know who does their shopping out in the woods around here? Maybe the big hairy woods beings, Whatever they are. Anyways this turned out to be an old shopping cart, overgrown a bit, red and looked like it had been there for awhile.
I was trying to figure just what I thought I had seen moving? Not sure yet.
Could be one of these things was trying to teleport at this spot, and the metal of the cart was interfering with the transporting process?

You stumbled across that most embarrassing of Bigfoot(s), the Homeless Bigfoot.

Scientists who say that Bigfoot exists... are any of them not eccentric weirdos?

I'm sure you're at least partially familiar with what/how the Mormons 'believe', right? And Krantz was Mormon too? Not sure I've ever known that. Though it's only two players, that's not just a random connection/coincidence IMO.

Has Meldrum ever said anything (or anything of note) about Krantz? I'd easily believe they had some kind of mentor-student relationship, but I don't know if they even knew each other?

Uhhh... I hope they are paying Ray Wallace's estate a royalty on this.

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

I'm sure you're at least partially familiar with what/how the Mormons 'believe', right? And Krantz was Mormon too? Not sure I've ever known that. Though it's only two players, that's not just a random connection/coincidence IMO.

Has Meldrum ever said anything (or anything of note) about Krantz? I'd easily believe they had some kind of mentor-student relationship, but I don't know if they even knew each other?

Krantz' family was LDS but he was not a practicing Mormon, so the story goes. He was definitely a mentor to Meldrum, who spends several pages in his book describing his interactions with Krantz, beginning in 1996.

Called "lapidary salutations" in the latest Skeptical Inquirer. Curiously, this is described in the context of poltergeist activity. I might research this a bit when I get a chance. It's interesting how it appears and is interpreted in different situations.

When exactly is he proposing that he'll be saying something OF VALUE SCIENTIFICALLY about Bigfoot (and/or its potential for existence) that we can actually touch and see and smell and taste? IMO he's never said, shown, written, described or presented anything of substance that genuinely and righteously furthers the Bigfoot cause. To me he's just another Bigfoot 'faithful' - exactly like the ones that inhabit all the various boards and sites including this one. His 'education' surely precedes him because once the real Meldrum shows up he blows all previous perceptions out of the water by literally underwhelming them to the point of boredom.

I found the interview extremely difficult to get through. Donna Cohrs was very annoying, with her constant interruptions and attempts to control the conversation, to dominate it, and her painfully obvious lack of any understanding of what Jeff was talking about anatomically or in paleoanthropology. Apparently she is stuck on trying to argue that sasquatch is a form of human instead of focusing on the morphology of sasquatch tracks, which she embarassingly describes in the most basic terms and just cannot grasp Jeff's answers in the specifics.

That is how this interview falls flat, the people conducting the interview have no real challenge to Meldrum's assertions of Afarensis not having an arch, or Meldrum's surprising claim that the arch didn't develop in humans until 200,000 years ago, because they have not done any research in this area at all, and even worse, pretend they know what they are talking about or Meldrum is agreeing with them when he isn't, and Cohrs intellectual dishonesty just screams when she makes a claim that she saw a sasquatch climb a tree and claimed to have seen the toes and feet, which Meldrum politely decides to leave alone when it's apparent Cohrs created the story instead of actually experienced it.

I can only imagine what Cohrs thought when going into this interview, "Sasquatch tracks look like human tracks, not ape tracks, this will be simple!" It's a bit more complicated than that, but the action of looking into what your guest has said and reading what others have said about the same subject is relatively easy, and part of the job.

[quote=HarryHenderson;5844549]To me, the major difference between Krantz and Meldrum is I always believed Krantz was sincere - I don't think I've ever thought Meldrum was.[/QUOT

it is difficult to imagine that he is not sincere. His whole history just shouts sincerity. And listening to him yell at that woman in the interview confirms it.
I wonder if he is like so many footers, just feelin persecuted, determined and in denial. I wonder if he has read Long's book? or talked to Bob H.

These locals 'investigators' are finding all these human sized, human-like, barefoot prints, and they bring Meldrum in to analyze them, and he says, that they could be juvenile sasquatch whose feet haven't morphed into the adult sasquatch foot-characteristics.

steaming pile of confirmation bias.
the man is a true believer. I wonder if he ever be convinced of his folly.

I found the interview extremely difficult to get through. Donna Cohrs was very annoying, with her constant interruptions and attempts to control the conversation, to dominate it, and her painfully obvious lack of any understanding of what Jeff was talking about anatomically or in paleoanthropology.

How embarrassing! I agree it was "extremely" difficult to get through! I laughed that she challenged Meldrum on his beliefs and not his expert knowledge in foot anatomy. Regardless of the Bigfooty Beliefs.

Quote:

That is how this interview falls flat

It falls flat because the hosts of the show set up Meldrum to listen to Cohrs ranting and raving like a lunatic drunk who has a delusional high self image of herself in Bigfootery and foot morphology.

Quote:

and even worse, pretend they know what they are talking about

Donna Cohrs has looked at a lot of footprints and casts of tracks so she has enough knowledge to debate an expert. I'd love to know where there are lots of Sasquatch footprints to examine She honestly sounds like someone trying desperately to push her beliefs (and expertise) in Bigfootery.

Quote:

Cohrs intellectual dishonesty just screams when she makes a claim that she saw a sasquatch climb a tree and claimed to have seen the toes and feet, which Meldrum politely decides to leave alone when it's apparent Cohrs created the story instead of actually experienced it.

Agreed. Let alone her mention of how skilled and knowledgeable she is in discerning Sasquatch tracks since she's seen so many of them. And, she's knowledgable about Bigfoot climbing trees because she saw the minute details in a thermal

Whew, what a waste of time listening to this, the info Meldrum discussed was interesting but Cohrs was downright annoying.

it is difficult to imagine that he is not sincere. His whole history just shouts sincerity. And listening to him yell at that woman in the interview confirms it. I wonder if he is like so many footers, just feelin persecuted, determined and in denial. I wonder if he has read Long's book? or talked to Bob H.

And again the limitations of the 'written word', especially when written in haste on an internet discussion forum, fails to properly convey my actual meaning. Ironically, developing and practicing proper writing skills is my one true reason for posting on internet forums at all.

Anyway, apparently I was being a little insincere myself in not properly qualifying my meaning regarding Meldrum. It's not that I think he's totally FOS - I do believe he has some amount of integrity. It's that I've come to believe he 'knows', and has known for a long time, that Bigfoot is simply and solely a myth and legend and any real hope he had for its existence went out with his baby's bathwater years ago. But since he's already out on a limb, and just in case there is a Bigfoot, he surely wants to be the man on the scene. Given the notion Bigfoot won't (and couldn't) ever be wholly disproved, he's really got little to lose (at this point) to just hang on and 'act' like the day might come one them-there-dead Bigfoot bodies goes 10-97.

And I think until the day he died, Krantz always and truly believed there is a Bigfoot.

How embarrassing! I agree it was "extremely" difficult to get through! I laughed that she challenged Meldrum on his beliefs and not his expert knowledge in foot anatomy. Regardless of the Bigfooty Beliefs.

LOL I know! I found myself saying "Who really gives a rat's @$$ if it's more closely related to an ape or human?!"

Quote:

It falls flat because the hosts of the show set up Meldrum to listen to Cohrs ranting and raving like a lunatic drunk who has a delusional high self image of herself in Bigfootery and foot morphology.

That was very apparent. They also have him scheduled for a show at the end of the month, I'd be very surprised if he did it. If they wanted some sort of debate with Meldrum, it's too bad they didn't pick someone who would actually check out Meldrum's sources and research.

Quote:

Donna Cohrs has looked at a lot of footprints and casts of tracks so she has enough knowledge to debate an expert. I'd love to know where there are lots of Sasquatch footprints to examine She honestly sounds like someone trying desperately to push her beliefs (and expertise) in Bigfootery.

Agreed. Let alone her mention of how skilled and knowledgeable she is in discerning Sasquatch tracks since she's seen so many of them. And, she's knowledgable about Bigfoot climbing trees because she saw the minute details in a thermal

LOL I know Meldrum claims to have around 150 casts in his collection, Cohrs tracks are probably every bit as authentic as her thermal-squatch-climbing-tree-and-able-to-see-the-toes sighting.

Quote:

Whew, what a waste of time listening to this, the info Meldrum discussed was interesting but Cohrs was downright annoying.

I gotta tell you, it was torture. I had enough after the first ten minutes, and started posting, but held off until the end to make sure what I was writing was accurate for the entire interview. Pretty much, the first ten minutes entail the rest of the interview, though after awhile I found myself saying out loud "Shut up [expeletive] !!!" everytime Cohrs spoke up.

Start at 4:24 and watch as he pulls out a GIANT cast of a Bigfoot print- What a goofy looking foot. Can you imagine something walking around with that?

Go to 5:10 and watch as he describes the morphing of a young BF's foot into an adult bigfoot's foot, with MTB and all.

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

... Cohrs intellectual dishonesty just screams when she makes a claim that she saw a sasquatch climb a tree and claimed to have seen the toes and feet, which Meldrum politely decides to leave alone when it's apparent Cohrs created the story instead of actually experienced it.
....

So you think Cohrs is dishonest because she says she saw a Bigfoot climb a tree????????? Come on. What is the whole bigfoot movement based on? The answer, for those who don't know, is people seeing Bigfoot walk around, throw pigs, lift cars, eat deer, run across roads at superhuman speeds, swim, and for all I know sink a hole in one at Pebble Beach. Are you saying eyewitnesses lie????ooooooooooo.....the old 'footer canard comes back to bite....
Cohrs was being brutally honest, intellectually, when she said words to the effect that Meldrum doesn't know what a bigfoot foot looks like. Meldrum almost swallowed his modem when she said that, because IT IS TRUE. He stammered and backfilled, but the cat was out of the bag.

__________________"Take the children, but LEAVE ME MY MONKEY!"
--Dewey Cox, in "Walk Hard: the Dewey Cox Story."
"The main skill of bigfoot investigators is finding ways to deny the obvious." --DFoot